Hobbes Vs Machiavelli Essay

There are numerous parallels between the theories of Hobbes and Machiavelli. These provide strength to both of their arguments but their similar outlook on the relationship between human nature and political structure also provides space for similar questioning. Through the comparison of Machiavelli and Hobbes, the question of the worth of liberty arises. Liberty and security go hand in hand in that security of the populace is necessary before any individual can truly be free. But in order to attain security, individuals must give up countless political rights. What happens when the general perception of what is right goes against that of the sovereign power? The main issue here is that politics cannot be reduced to just an issue of who holds …show more content…
This relates directly back to freedom in Hobbes' concept of motion. Freedom is infringed upon when movement is bound or restricted by an external force. The main question that arises here is what exactly constitutes a restrictive external force. The state of nature is one where preservation of life is impossible and humans by nature want to preserve their lives. Through this line of argument, the choice between joining together in a covenant to form a sovereign power and remaining in the state of nature is a choice between being able to preserve one's life and not being able to. For Hobbes, entering a situation where it is impossible to preserve one's own life is a free choice. Despite the preservation of life being a crucial facet of his understanding of human nature. This is only rational when Hobbes' theory on freedom in motion is viewed without compromise. A choice made in a state of fear or desire to escape danger is still very much a free choice according to Hobbes. The decision to willingly remain in an environment where death is a constant threat is a viable choice to make because, "fear and liberty are consistent" (II. xxi.